Legal Opinion

Graham v. Home Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 10, 1923PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Hinman, J.:

It is our view that the warranty, “ while occupied by owner and tenant,” must be construed not only presently but prospectively covering the period of the policy. It is also our view that the context does not indicate that “ or ” was intended for “ and.” There were two dwellings on the farm. The former owner occupied one and the tenant the other at the time of the issuance of the policy. The respective rates for occupancy by the owner and the tenant were different. If there had been no intervening renewal of the policy for the benefit of a subsequent owner, we think there could be…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Van Schoick v. . Niagara Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
  2. Ripley v. . the &198tna Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1864
  3. Gray v. . Germania Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1898
  4. Hayes v. Saratoga & Washington Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Baldwin's Bank of Penn Yan v. Farmers' Reliance Mutual InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API